I think it also shows how much people underrate pitchers when trying to pin a number on them. Yeah, in a perfect world, the Cubs would have the Tigers rotation of last year and have four significantly above-average starters. But they don't. I don't care what world you live in, the Cubs do not have one #1, three #4s and a #5, at least not unless everything goes wrong. Well I have been saying that this whole time, and now this new article proves it. Even at WORST we don't have three #4's. And at BEST we've got a #2 and #3. This article doesn't prove anything. We could have any number of combinations next seasons. What we do know is we don't have a lockdown guaranteed #2. The rest we'll find out during the season. It's pitching, therefore it's unpredictable. Yes I agree. But I do say we've got quite alot of depth. And it's more likely than last year we have someone in there that can beat the average "#2" ERA. What happens if Marquis improves from his bad year? Well he's more like an average #4. So we might have a 1, two 3's, and two 4's. Who knows.